Ravish Kumar : प्यारे नॉन रेज़िडेंट इंडियन… इस रिपोर्ट को पढ़ें। कैसे एक केंद्रीय मंत्री एक बड़े अख़बार के संपादक को फोन कर धमका रहे हैं। यह जानकर आप अपनी जगह पर ही बने रहें क्योंकि आप ऐसे ही भारत को साकार करना चाहते थे। यह कोई पहला मौका नहीं है। यहाँ के समाज ने भी आए दिन प्रेस के साथ हो रही इन हरकतों को सहजता से पचा लिया है। सोचिए ऐसी धमकियों से बाकी प्रेस की क्या हालत होती होगी। मंत्री का लगता है इसके बाद जल्दी प्रमोशन होने वाला है। प्रधानमंत्री ह्यूस्टन में जिस विविधता और लोकतांत्रिकता का बखान कर रहे थे, उसकी सच्चाई यह है।
यह ख़बर सिर्फ नॉन रेज़िडेंट इंडियन के लिए है। विदेश नहीं जा सकने वाले भारतीय भी पढ़ सकते हैं। राजगोपाल शानदार संपादक हैं। अगर उन्हें इस आसानी से धमकाया जा सकता है तो सोचिए। मिर्ज़ापुर वाले पत्रकार पर एफआईआर कर पूरे राज्य के पत्रकारों को चुप करा दिया होगा।
नोट –
अब अखबार की रिपोर्ट के अलावा बाबुल सुप्रिया का भी वर्जन है। उन्होंने कहा कि वे किसी की बातचीत को रिकार्ड नहीं करते हैं क्योंकि ऐसा करना ग़लत है। मैं इससे सहमत हूँ लेकिन जब अखबार ने छाप दिया है तो इसके होने पर सार्वजनिक करने में बुराई नहीं है। लेकिन जब रिकॉर्डिंग नहीं है तो फिर इस पर आगे बात करने से कोई फ़ायदा नहीं।
टेलिग्राफ़ ने कहा है कि राजगोपाल ने उनसे सभ्यता से बात की अगर नहीं की तो बातचीत की रिकॉर्डिंग ज़ाहिर करो। मंत्री कहते हैं कि वे टेलिग्राफ़ में छपी रिपोर्ट के कुछ अंश से सहमत नहीं थे। जिस वीडियो से एक तस्वीर लेकर छापी गई वही एक मात्र सच्चाई नहीं है। उस वीडियो को देखा जाना चाहिए। उनका कहना है कि वे इस रिपोर्ट से सहमत नहीं हैं। उन्होंने खुद फोन किया था लेकिन वे अपना पक्ष रखने के लिए बात कर रहे थे। उन्होंने धमकी नहीं दी।
इस तरह यहाँ दो पक्ष हो जाते हैं। उम्मीद है टेलिग्राफ़ मंत्री का भी वर्जन छापेगा। इस बीच राजगोपाल से बात हो जाती है तो इस पर उनका जवाब लेने की कोशिश करूँगा। यहाँ लिखूँगा भी। राजगोपाल का जवाब आप अंग्रेज़ी में पढ़ें-
- I repeatedly told the minister to send a letter. We will publish. We will still do that. In fact, on Sunday, when a guard alleged that the minister had threatened him, in keeping with regular journalistic standards, our reporter had spoken to the minister and he minister’s version was prominently published. Problem is often those in power do not speak to newspapers they deem critical of their activities. If they speak, we will definitely publish. But that does not mean we will give our editorial pages for ghost-written PR articles by ministers.
- The minister told me he is recording the conversation. I had told him then and there to upload it. As far as I know, he has not done so for 48 hours after the call. Whereas within minutes of me cutting the call, he tweeted that I used filthy language. Which is completely false.
- I took the call in the newsroom where many journalists were present. They could not hear the minister but they could hear me. It was a heated exchange and many could hear what I was saying clearly. After the conversation was over, I checked with several journalists whether in the heat of the moment I used any bad word. Every single person I spoke to said I was very angry but I did not use a single bad word. Of course, it will be said all the journalists report to me and so they will not say anything different. But I respect and admire each of these journalists and I will consider it an insult if anyone says that they are so easily pliable.
- The minister kept changing his goalposts, which is why I did not want it to be discussed on phone. First he wanted an apology for a report we did not carry. Then he said the picture caption was wrong as it said he grabbed the shirt of the student. The picture shows exactly that. It was not a social media picture. The newspaper’s photographer Sanat Kumar Sinha clucked the picture. The video of the incident is available in public domain also. It makes it clear how the minister was behaving. Then he said he had a problem with the headline. All these are recorded on his own Twitter account between 6.30pm and 8.30pm on Saturday, how his complaints kept changing.
- The Telegraph report clearly said right at the beginning that the minister was barricaded at the university. It also mentions his hair was pulled. So, it cannot be said that only half or selective information was used.
- I have never made any personal charge against any politician, most of whom I respect and admire, till now. Why should I suddenly start making up allegations against a junior minister? An unsaid element in all this is the concern of my wife and children for whom it is not pleasant, to say the least, or reassuring to be told that I had been abused with filthy language by a minister representing the government.
- The tweet by the minister on Saturday soon after the call makes it clear he wanted something called “an amicable small apology” to be published. That was the primary objective of the call. What is demand for “an amicable small apology”, other than intimidation by those wielding power? That is why I refused to entertain any further conversation and asked him to send a letter or legal notice. Also, he called me after making a public threat on Twitter to sue us for a report we had neither published nor had anything to with. When he called me about this and realised this, the minister started changing his complaints.
https://www.telegraphindia.com/india/f-ing-sold-out-babul-supriyo-to-editor/cid/1706642
एनडीटीवी के वरिष्ठ पत्रकार रवीश कुमार की एफबी वॉल से.
इसे भी पढ़ें-
‘द टेलीग्राफ’ के संपादक आर राजगोपाल की इस वजह से हो रही है पूरे देश में चर्चा
